Please see the above image of the tree guard that we are proposing to use in the neighbourhood. It has been “photo-shopped” in black from the original stainless steel. The design of the tree grill has had to meet fairly stringent requirements – it needs to be an “open” design to allow for visibility and prevent rubbish becoming caught, it needs to be fixed to the ground in a certain way to ensure strength and prevent theft, and it needs to be robust. This particular design will also allow for parts to be replaced if damaged without having to replace the entire structure. The guards will provide protection to the tree from vehicles and vandalism – they are also understated but attractive. We are negotiating with the company who will provide the guard – and we believe that we will be able to get the large number that the project requires (approx 32) within the budget.

Great – black seems to be the prefered choice from residents we have spoken to. It is also the prefered choice of the council. However, if there are other residents who feel strongly about the stainless steel finish please let me know.

Not mad on stainless steel as it could look zimmer frame like?? I have a slight worry looking at this that it looks good and easy to climb on ? Do you not think that kids/ youths will use as a climbing frame? Personally I love the original traditional style of tree guard with a number of vertical uprights and curled over at top. I presume we cannot afford these?

The good thing about black is that it feels far more “residential” as opposed to the stainless steel approach to Wood Green etc. Its actually a little bit higher in person and the first band isn’t at an easily accessible height – are youths using them as a climbing frame a likely outcome? The more traditional style of tree guard isn’t necessarily more expensive but it does have issues with visibility and they often end up getting used as rubbish bins – the above style is also potentially more easily repaired.

As you will see – this is in a retail park (3rd image from left). And therefore entirely suitable. However, such a design might appear incongruous within a residential area, given its lack of finesse and apparent municipal/industrial qualities. The circumference also seems a little too generous. And the form lacking in ‘character’. With some research there are a wide variety of companies offering more appropriate solutions to narrow streets and roads. The designs are less ‘fortress’ like, and come is standard sizes. Below some examples:

Thanks for the input. I think it is easier to address the above three comments (from V.B, Bailey, JS) at the same time. Firstly, in reference to the guard being ‘chosen’ – we have had the example up for the past two weeks to allow for comments and questions before progressing further. Other that the two comments above, we have had positive feedback from residents regarding the design.

The above tree guard is not a product made by Voss – the two are actually quite different in design and the photos in the link are not a particularly helpful comparison. The supplier is a much smaller independent company that allows us to negotiate price and details of design. The council require a large number of strict specifications to the design, particularly since a number will actually fall within the carriageway. These specifications also need to be passed by maintenance and the road safety audit process. Therefore, as mentioned above we need a very open design that will not allow litter/leaf build up and providing very clear sight lines for drivers/pedestrians. In many locations, the actual footprint of the design is important since the traffic calming designs require a bold statement in open areas. We have previously gone through the examples that have been suggested above but unfortunately none are suitable due to one or more of the following reasons – cost (some are prohibitively expensive), strength, sightlines, durability, deliverability (timeframe), and maintenance. We will keep you notified of developments. Thanks.